The implementation of the Kyoto Protocol in limiting green house emissions.
The future of the Blue Fin Tuna species.
The question of the disposal of nuclear waste.
The effect of mercury pollution on local populations.
The United States is grateful for the opportunity to become part of this conference and the chance to find suitable solutions for environmental issues, such as nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal is an important issue to the modern world because nuclear power highly benefits human society, while at the same time potentially resulting in serious consequences. Exposure of radioactive waste in the environment must be eliminated if nuclear power is to be used, and better disposing methods of nuclear waste must be achieved. The United States highly values the environment and its well being. Therefore, it looks forward to discussing this and other issues in the following days. Thank you.
Forum: The Environment II Council
Question of: The Question of the Disposal of Nuclear Waste Delegation: The United States of America
Delegate: Cindy Gao
School: Shanghai American School
Honorable chair, fellow delegates and distinguished guests, The United States is grateful for the opportunity to become part of this conference, exchanging its opinions with other countries in order to find suitable solutions for environmental issues, such as nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal is an important issue to the modern world because nuclear power highly benefits the human society, while it may end up causing serious consequences. Exposure of radioactive waste toward the environment must be annihilated if nuclear power is to be used, and the betterment of nuclear waste disposing methods must be achieved. The US highly values the environment and its well being. Therefore, it looks forward to discussing this and other issues in the following days with all those present at this conference. Thank you.
Forum: The Environment II Council Topic Three
Submitter: United States of America
Question of:"The Question of the disposal of nuclear waste."
The Environment II Council,
Recalling from previous resolution E/CN.17/1994/1 of the Economics and Social Council, that the past five decades have witnessed a sharp accumulation of radioactive waste generated from nuclear weapons programs as well as other facilities involving radioactive experimentations and generations,
Deeply concerned that most radioactive waste is capable of surviving millions of years before it becomes depleted with radiation,
Disturbed by the fact that it is estimated about 200, 000 cubic meter of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste and 10,000 cubic meters of high-level radioactive waste are generated annually from the nuclear power fuel cycle worldwide,
Reminding fellow delegates that the purpose of the use of nuclear power is to decrease harmful consequences of fossil fuel toward the environment including:
a) Increase in carbon emissions,
b) Increase in global average temperature,
c) Possible depletion of natural resources,
Noting with regret, thatfor the past century, pollution caused during nuclear experiments have caused a large scale of damage toward local environments,
Acknowledging that the United States is minimizing the effects of nuclear waste disposal, with the construction of a nuclear waste dump in the Yucca Mountains,
Taking note that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing to issue a regulation that will govern the disposal of power plant nuclear waste in the United States for the next 1 million years,
Deeply disturbed by the reprocessing methods that countries such as Grance are currently using since they increase the proliferation of nuclear weapons, causing threats for neighboring countries and local populations,
Emphasizing the need for alternative energy resources that cause little or no harm toward the natural environment,
1. Requests careful investigation of surrounding area before the construction of nuclear power related facilities;
2. Recommends measures to be taken in the protection of local populations and environment surrounding nuclear power facilities;
3. Strongly suggests nations to help France as well as others that depend heavily on nuclear power to discover methods of nuclear waste disposal that decrease effects upon the local environment;
4. Invites all other nations to create Local Nuclear Waste Monitoring Association (NWDMA), with its goals to
a) Monitor the discarding of nuclear waste worldwide,
b) Supervise the environmental conditions surrounding nuclear waste disposal facilities;
5. Encourages all countries to elicit money and research to find alternative methods to dispose nuclear waste.
Note: The wiki does not allow me to indent the subs.
The implementation of the Kyoto Protocol in limiting green house emissions. What is the problem? How does it affect your country? The problem of the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol is that many countries have not truly taken action in reaching the goals set in the protocol.
What has your country done to combat the problem? The previous president of the United States George W. Bush had promised to reduce the carbon dioxide emission. However, shortly after he took office in 2001, he withdrew the US’s support within the protocol. However, the current president of US supports the protocol and believes that the environment should be taken care of.
What are the various “sides” in the debate? There are mainly two sides to this debate. The for side of the debate believes that it is essential for the Kyoto Protocol to be put into action because of the large impact the environment has upon us. However the against side of the debate believes the protocol to be unnecessary or inapplicable.
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country? The United States has been supporting environmental protecting until George W. Bush’s inauguration, when the US completely altered its perspective. The effects of the Kyoto Protocol upon the US’s GDP are one of the essential aspects that the US feels it to be very important. However, US understand the importance of the environment and the Obama administration as already taken action to combat with this problem.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved? Everyone is involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference? The US’s point of view is mainly encouraging others to take action for the Obama administration have not be given enough time to truly deal with the protocol but signs can be seen that Obama will take action in becoming more involved and supportive in the Kyoto Protocol. The US will probably be in the spotlight during the debate of this issue because in the past years, the Bush administration has been negative toward the protocol, causing disappointment from other countries as the US did not continually support the protocol as it did when it was first formed.
What arguments will other countries make? Other countries such as those around Middle East may not be fully supportive because it would highly affect their economy if the purchase of fossil fuel decreased drastically. However, none would stand too strong in their position.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position? Other country’s positions do not affect the position of the US.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position? In the past years, carbon emission has caused the worsening of the greenhouse effect, causing the polar icecap to be melting at an unimaginable speed. Many countries that had agreed on the protocol had not done what they had promised to the international community and the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will most certainly help reduce these effects.
The Future of the Blue Fin Tuna Species. What is the problem? How does it affect your country? The problem is that over fishing is causing Blue Fin Tuna to deplete around the world, especially around the Mediterranean Sea. It affects the US because the US plays a big role in the fishing industry, and the depletion of Blue Fin Tuna will affect the US economy. The US believes that the EU’s management of Blue Fin Tunas is incorrect and has not been very efficient and the US itself has been willing
What has your country done to combat the problem? The United States called for a temporary suspension of the eastern fishery last year until effective controls could be implemented because of these concerns. It is also keenly interested in the results of assessments. The US has promised to lower its limit in Blue Fin Tuna catch down to 18,000 tons annually by 2010.
What are the various “sides” in the debate? The more optimistic nations believe that this issue is neither important nor severe, while others believe that this issue is essential for the balance to exist between humans and the environment. Some countries are catching twice the amount they are allowed will the US fishermen are only finding 15% of their limit. Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved? The US is involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference? The US believes that this issue is one that has a long history and need a period of time before improvement can be seen. Due to this reason, the US believes that countries need to be allowed to fish at a reasonable amount rather than completely cut off some nations’ incomes.
What arguments will other countries make? Some other countries “cares” more about the environment will argue that it is important for the limit to be set right, etc… however, many other countries will stand will stand with the US in this issue believing that rather than lowering the limit greatly at this time, it will be more realistic to set a long term plan.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position? Other country’s positions do not affect the position of the US.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position? The current harvest limit is more than twice the amount ICCAT scientists believe to be suitable. ICCAT commissioners on Nov. 25 set the catch limit as high as 22,000 tons when the official suggestion of the limit is 15,000 tons annually. When the limit is set twice as high, the fishermen still take double of what they are allowed to.
The Question of the Disposal of Nuclear Waste
What is the problem? How does it affect your country? The problem is that nuclear waste cannot be disposed properly, which causes the pollution to both the environment and human health. There has not been a way of disposal that allows no pollution to enter the local environment, which trouble countries’ governments greatly. The US is affected by this issue because it is also a country that desperately needs a resolution to this issue.
What has your country done to combat the problem? The US has a proposal to build a deep underground nuclear dump in the Yucca Mountain, but the local government has been extremely against this idea and this project has not been put into action.
What are the various “sides” in the debate? The US government hopes to build a nuclear dump, however, the local governments have opposed to this decision and interfered with the proceeding of the construction. Some suggests that the US undertake the same process as France, reprocess the nuclear waste to reuse. However, this process creates a lot of pollution which defeats the purpose of using nuclear energy, to decrease pollution
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country? Pollution, cost and efficiency are the most important aspects of this issue. Nuclear waste should not be disposed in a way that causes pollution or affects the health of the surrounding environment and population, but it should also be efficient in cost and time.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved? Involved…
How will your country shape the debate at the conference? During the conference, US will obviously gain many supporters. The US’s opinion upon this and other issues will also be highly affective, and may alter the votes of many other countries.
What arguments will other countries make? Obviously, less developed countries would not use nuclear energy. Even if they do, they would definitely dispose the waste in the cheapest way possible, such as simply burying the waste. So other countries may not see the importance of this issue, and that they woudl argue there are much more convenient ways of disposing nuclear waste and that it is unnecessary to use so much money and things on this issue.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position? There is not a single country that can affect the position of the US, but it might consider differently if a large portion of delegates unite together.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position? The harm caused already to local population of the previous nuclear waste burial is evidence that there is need to find a better way for nuclear waste disposal. The pollution caused during the reprocessing of France’s nuclear waste also shows that it is not a suitable resolution.
The Effect of Mercury Pollution on Local Population.
What is the problem? How does it affect your country? The problem is that the mercury pollution released from coal-fired power plants is causing many serious consequences in the local population such as an increase of autism from mutation rather than genetic reasons. The US is creating 40% of the mercury pollution worldwide.
What has your country done to combat the problem? The Bush administration had disagreed with any resolution in order to reduce the effects of this issue. However, the current president Obama had claimed to be supportive toward organization a legally binding document in order to reduce mercury pollution.
What are the various “sides” in the debate? Most of the nations believe that there must be actions taken to improve the situation of mercury pollution, because this issue highly affects aquatic animals living in waters where large amounts of mercury is exposed. However, different countries have slightly different situations due to the differences of the cause and effects of this issue. For example, some countries think coal-fired power plants are causes most of the pollution while for other countries, incinerators are more important. Some other countries where this issue is not occurring as severely do not hope as much to create such legally binding documents where they must devote large amounts of financial and manpower in order to do what is not so important to them.
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country? To the US, every aspect is important. For example, the environment is important because it determines the well-being of the whole nation and its citizens. The financial spending is also important, since the economic crisis has been a great burden for the US and it is not an easy time for the US. The effects of this issue on political relationship with other countries are also important because good relationships must exist for countries to reach agreements upon issues.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved? Involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference? The US will show support toward the protection of the environment overall. However, it will be careful in choosing which resolutions to support, since this issue is extremely important to the maintenance of the ecosystems that it is related to, and indirectly, to the health of the whole country.
What arguments will other countries make? Other countries may argue that combating with this issue is unnecessary, but there are many statistics that prove this statement to be wrong.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position? Positions of other countries do not affect the position of the US. However, the US might consider differently is a large portion of the council thinks differently.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position? The increase in mercury level in different bodies of water around the US and the poisoned fish that lives in these waters makes it obvious that mercury pollution is essential. Once people consume those fish that are poisoned, they are also exposed to amounts of mercury, causing autism and other genetic mutations.
Forum: Human Rights
Question of: The adverse effects of the illicit movement of dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights.
Delegate: Veronica Chung, Russia Recognizingthat The Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights is mandated by the Commission on Human Rights to receive communications from individuals and groups who declare that their human rights have been violated by illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes, Fully alarmed that 70% of industrial toxic wastes are dumped into rivers and lakes untreated. Especially in China where 70% of the lakes and rivers are polluted from industrial wastes, leaving 300 million people “forced to rely on polluted water supplies”,
Fully aware that many developing countries do not have the national capacities and technologies to process such wastes in order to eradicate or diminish their adverse effects on human rights, including the right to life, the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and the right to water, food, adequate housing and work, Pointing out that the number of places where water has effectively been starved of oxygen, also called the “dead zones” ,globally has doubled since 1990 and are now filling up 70,000sq kilometers of earth’s surface, which sit the size of Ireland, Reaffirms that illicit traffic in and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes constitute a serious threat to human rights, including the rights to water, food, adequate housing and work,
Expresses its appreciation to relevant UN bodies, in particular the United Nations Environment Program for the support to special rapporteurs on researches and investigations, 1. Urges all government to take appropriate legislative and other measures, in line with their international obligations, to prevent the illegal movement of toxic and hazardous wastes from developed to developing countries;
2. Requests the governments of developed countries to provide financial assistance to developing countries to create large waste-recycling programs in order to help eradicate as much wastes as possible;
3. Asks that all governments ban the export of toxic and hazardous products , chemicals, pesticides and persistent organic pollutants that are currently banned or severely restricted in their own countries;
4. Invites the United Nations Environment Program and all relevant organizations to continue to intensify their coordination, international cooperation and technical assistance on environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes, including the question of their transboundary movement; 5. Strongly recommends strengthening the role of national environmental protection agencies and NGOs that work with this issue and provide them necessary medical and financial means with its action.
Victoria's Questions
What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
Blue fin tunas are being overfished alot and it is almost near extinct. Madagascar already has tons of unique animals that are extinct and others are in the same condition as the blue fin tunas. Pushed towards extinction by human activity.
What has your country done to combat the problem?
It has tried to stop the huge deforestation and fires that happen very oftenly every year.
What are the various “sides” in the debate?
Some are fighting to stop fishing blue fin tunas while others argue that there are still plenty of blue fin tunas in the ocean and if they stop fishing there would be too much blue fin tunas.
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
Blue fin tunas are still being overfished and if it is not stoped serious damage can done. Like parts of the natural food chain will be in danger.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
By joining some groups that are saving blue fin tunas and allying with countries especially in Europe that are doing with all there efforts the best they can to slowly stop fishing blue fin tunas.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
It might mention how some unique animals in Madagascar are extremly endangered and how we don't want the Blu FIn Tunas to go the same way
What arguments will other countries make?
-They are already trying to stop the fishing
-They don't have much time to consider the blue fin tunas with all the economy crisis going on
-The blue fin tuna is mainly not their problem
-It is some country's main economy
-If they don't fish there might be too much blue fin tunas
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
they might argue that blue fin tunas are no where near extinct and there are still plenty left in the Pacific and Atlantic ocean
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
Opening Speech
Forum of: Environment 2
Questioning of: The future of Blue Fin Tuna species
Delegation: Madagascar
Delegate: Victoria Lin.
School: SAS Pudong
Honorable chair and fellow delegates, the country of Madagascar recognizes the importance of stopping the burning of the rain forests which homes the unique animals of Madagascar. However the delegate of Madagascar would like to focus on the future of another extremely endangered animals, Blue Fin Tunas.
Blue Fin Tunas are being over fished at an extreme rate. Even though efforts have been made by many fellow countries, Blue Fin Tunas are being pushed to the brink of extinction by human activity. The extinction of Blue Fin Tunas would leave a huge dent in the balance of nature. We hope to find a way to help and save the endangered tuna species. The delegate of Madagascar is looking forward to debating this and other issues. Thank you very much.
Back to top Resolution Final Draft
Environment 2 By Victoria (Madagascar) Submitter: Madagascar
Topic: The future of Blue Fin Tunas and Madagascar endangered animals
Environment 2
Alarmed by the fact that the population of Blue Fin tunas（Thunnus orientalis）has dropped dramatically during the past 4 years Bearing in mind that many groups such as, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), Commission for the Conservation of Southern Blue fin Tuna (CCSBT), International Commission for the
Conservation of the Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) are trying with effort to protect Blue Fin Tunas
Noting with concern that a lot of Madagascar's unique wildlife just like Blue Fin Tunas are at the edge of extinction. Such as the Golden Bamboo Lemur, Golden-Crowned Sifika, and the Lesser Yellow Bat
Pointing out that if countries don't take a another step towards protecting endangered species such as Blue fin Tunas may become politically unstable just like a lot of Madagascar’s animals
Deeply concerned for these endangered animals which are being pushed toward extinction by human activity
Acknowledging the fact that after the riot that happened in early this year Madagascar gave about no attention towards the endangered animals of Madagascar
Urges member states to help try to decrease the amount of human activity around these animals
Supports all the other groups and countries who are trying to put an stop against over fishing
Further request state members to take a step towards Madagascar’s dying wildlife
The United States is grateful for the opportunity to become part of this conference and the chance to find suitable solutions for environmental issues, such as nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal is an important issue to the modern world because nuclear power highly benefits human society, while at the same time potentially resulting in serious consequences. Exposure of radioactive waste in the environment must be eliminated if nuclear power is to be used, and better disposing methods of nuclear waste must be achieved. The United States highly values the environment and its well being. Therefore, it looks forward to discussing this and other issues in the following days. Thank you.
Forum: The Environment II Council
Question of: The Question of the Disposal of Nuclear Waste
Delegation: The United States of America
Delegate: Cindy Gao
School: Shanghai American School
Honorable chair, fellow delegates and distinguished guests,
The United States is grateful for the opportunity to become part of this conference, exchanging its opinions with other countries in order to find suitable solutions for environmental issues, such as nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal is an important issue to the modern world because nuclear power highly benefits the human society, while it may end up causing serious consequences. Exposure of radioactive waste toward the environment must be annihilated if nuclear power is to be used, and the betterment of nuclear waste disposing methods must be achieved. The US highly values the environment and its well being. Therefore, it looks forward to discussing this and other issues in the following days with all those present at this conference. Thank you.
Forum: The Environment II Council Topic Three
Submitter: United States of America
Question of:"The Question of the disposal of nuclear waste."
The Environment II Council,
Recalling from previous resolution E/CN.17/1994/1 of the Economics and Social Council, that the past five decades have witnessed a sharp accumulation of radioactive waste generated from nuclear weapons programs as well as other facilities involving radioactive experimentations and generations,
Deeply concerned that most radioactive waste is capable of surviving millions of years before it becomes depleted with radiation,
Disturbed by the fact that it is estimated about 200, 000 cubic meter of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste and 10,000 cubic meters of high-level radioactive waste are generated annually from the nuclear power fuel cycle worldwide,
Reminding fellow delegates that the purpose of the use of nuclear power is to decrease harmful consequences of fossil fuel toward the environment including:
a) Increase in carbon emissions,
b) Increase in global average temperature,
c) Possible depletion of natural resources,
Noting with regret, thatfor the past century, pollution caused during nuclear experiments have caused a large scale of damage toward local environments,
Acknowledging that the United States is minimizing the effects of nuclear waste disposal, with the construction of a nuclear waste dump in the Yucca Mountains,
Taking note that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing to issue a regulation that will govern the disposal of power plant nuclear waste in the United States for the next 1 million years,
Deeply disturbed by the reprocessing methods that countries such as Grance are currently using since they increase the proliferation of nuclear weapons, causing threats for neighboring countries and local populations,
Emphasizing the need for alternative energy resources that cause little or no harm toward the natural environment,
1. Requests careful investigation of surrounding area before the construction of nuclear power related facilities;
2. Recommends measures to be taken in the protection of local populations and environment surrounding nuclear power facilities;
3. Strongly suggests nations to help France as well as others that depend heavily on nuclear power to discover methods of nuclear waste disposal that decrease effects upon the local environment;
4. Invites all other nations to create Local Nuclear Waste Monitoring Association (NWDMA), with its goals to
a) Monitor the discarding of nuclear waste worldwide,
b) Supervise the environmental conditions surrounding nuclear waste disposal facilities;
5. Encourages all countries to elicit money and research to find alternative methods to dispose nuclear waste.
Note: The wiki does not allow me to indent the subs.
The implementation of the Kyoto Protocol in limiting green house emissions.
What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
The problem of the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol is that many countries have not truly taken action in reaching the goals set in the protocol.
What has your country done to combat the problem?
The previous president of the United States George W. Bush had promised to reduce the carbon dioxide emission. However, shortly after he took office in 2001, he withdrew the US’s support within the protocol. However, the current president of US supports the protocol and believes that the environment should be taken care of.
What are the various “sides” in the debate?
There are mainly two sides to this debate. The for side of the debate believes that it is essential for the Kyoto Protocol to be put into action because of the large impact the environment has upon us. However the against side of the debate believes the protocol to be unnecessary or inapplicable.
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
The United States has been supporting environmental protecting until George W. Bush’s inauguration, when the US completely altered its perspective. The effects of the Kyoto Protocol upon the US’s GDP are one of the essential aspects that the US feels it to be very important. However, US understand the importance of the environment and the Obama administration as already taken action to combat with this problem.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
Everyone is involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
The US’s point of view is mainly encouraging others to take action for the Obama administration have not be given enough time to truly deal with the protocol but signs can be seen that Obama will take action in becoming more involved and supportive in the Kyoto Protocol. The US will probably be in the spotlight during the debate of this issue because in the past years, the Bush administration has been negative toward the protocol, causing disappointment from other countries as the US did not continually support the protocol as it did when it was first formed.
What arguments will other countries make?
Other countries such as those around Middle East may not be fully supportive because it would highly affect their economy if the purchase of fossil fuel decreased drastically. However, none would stand too strong in their position.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
Other country’s positions do not affect the position of the US.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
In the past years, carbon emission has caused the worsening of the greenhouse effect, causing the polar icecap to be melting at an unimaginable speed. Many countries that had agreed on the protocol had not done what they had promised to the international community and the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will most certainly help reduce these effects.
The Future of the Blue Fin Tuna Species.
What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
The problem is that over fishing is causing Blue Fin Tuna to deplete around the world, especially around the Mediterranean Sea. It affects the US because the US plays a big role in the fishing industry, and the depletion of Blue Fin Tuna will affect the US economy. The US believes that the EU’s management of Blue Fin Tunas is incorrect and has not been very efficient and the US itself has been willing
What has your country done to combat the problem?
The United States called for a temporary suspension of the eastern fishery last year until effective controls could be implemented because of these concerns. It is also keenly interested in the results of assessments. The US has promised to lower its limit in Blue Fin Tuna catch down to 18,000 tons annually by 2010.
What are the various “sides” in the debate?
The more optimistic nations believe that this issue is neither important nor severe, while others believe that this issue is essential for the balance to exist between humans and the environment. Some countries are catching twice the amount they are allowed will the US fishermen are only finding 15% of their limit. Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
The US is involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
The US believes that this issue is one that has a long history and need a period of time before improvement can be seen. Due to this reason, the US believes that countries need to be allowed to fish at a reasonable amount rather than completely cut off some nations’ incomes.
What arguments will other countries make?
Some other countries “cares” more about the environment will argue that it is important for the limit to be set right, etc… however, many other countries will stand will stand with the US in this issue believing that rather than lowering the limit greatly at this time, it will be more realistic to set a long term plan.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
Other country’s positions do not affect the position of the US.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
The current harvest limit is more than twice the amount ICCAT scientists believe to be suitable. ICCAT commissioners on Nov. 25 set the catch limit as high as 22,000 tons when the official suggestion of the limit is 15,000 tons annually. When the limit is set twice as high, the fishermen still take double of what they are allowed to.
The Question of the Disposal of Nuclear Waste
What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
The problem is that nuclear waste cannot be disposed properly, which causes the pollution to both the environment and human health. There has not been a way of disposal that allows no pollution to enter the local environment, which trouble countries’ governments greatly. The US is affected by this issue because it is also a country that desperately needs a resolution to this issue.
What has your country done to combat the problem?
The US has a proposal to build a deep underground nuclear dump in the Yucca Mountain, but the local government has been extremely against this idea and this project has not been put into action.
What are the various “sides” in the debate?
The US government hopes to build a nuclear dump, however, the local governments have opposed to this decision and interfered with the proceeding of the construction. Some suggests that the US undertake the same process as France, reprocess the nuclear waste to reuse. However, this process creates a lot of pollution which defeats the purpose of using nuclear energy, to decrease pollution
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
Pollution, cost and efficiency are the most important aspects of this issue. Nuclear waste should not be disposed in a way that causes pollution or affects the health of the surrounding environment and population, but it should also be efficient in cost and time.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
Involved…
How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
During the conference, US will obviously gain many supporters. The US’s opinion upon this and other issues will also be highly affective, and may alter the votes of many other countries.
What arguments will other countries make?
Obviously, less developed countries would not use nuclear energy. Even if they do, they would definitely dispose the waste in the cheapest way possible, such as simply burying the waste. So other countries may not see the importance of this issue, and that they woudl argue there are much more convenient ways of disposing nuclear waste and that it is unnecessary to use so much money and things on this issue.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
There is not a single country that can affect the position of the US, but it might consider differently if a large portion of delegates unite together.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
The harm caused already to local population of the previous nuclear waste burial is evidence that there is need to find a better way for nuclear waste disposal. The pollution caused during the reprocessing of France’s nuclear waste also shows that it is not a suitable resolution.
The Effect of Mercury Pollution on Local Population.
What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
The problem is that the mercury pollution released from coal-fired power plants is causing many serious consequences in the local population such as an increase of autism from mutation rather than genetic reasons. The US is creating 40% of the mercury pollution worldwide.
What has your country done to combat the problem?
The Bush administration had disagreed with any resolution in order to reduce the effects of this issue. However, the current president Obama had claimed to be supportive toward organization a legally binding document in order to reduce mercury pollution.
What are the various “sides” in the debate?
Most of the nations believe that there must be actions taken to improve the situation of mercury pollution, because this issue highly affects aquatic animals living in waters where large amounts of mercury is exposed. However, different countries have slightly different situations due to the differences of the cause and effects of this issue. For example, some countries think coal-fired power plants are causes most of the pollution while for other countries, incinerators are more important. Some other countries where this issue is not occurring as severely do not hope as much to create such legally binding documents where they must devote large amounts of financial and manpower in order to do what is not so important to them.
Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
To the US, every aspect is important. For example, the environment is important because it determines the well-being of the whole nation and its citizens. The financial spending is also important, since the economic crisis has been a great burden for the US and it is not an easy time for the US. The effects of this issue on political relationship with other countries are also important because good relationships must exist for countries to reach agreements upon issues.
If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
Involved.
How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
The US will show support toward the protection of the environment overall. However, it will be careful in choosing which resolutions to support, since this issue is extremely important to the maintenance of the ecosystems that it is related to, and indirectly, to the health of the whole country.
What arguments will other countries make?
Other countries may argue that combating with this issue is unnecessary, but there are many statistics that prove this statement to be wrong.
How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
Positions of other countries do not affect the position of the US. However, the US might consider differently is a large portion of the council thinks differently.
Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
The increase in mercury level in different bodies of water around the US and the poisoned fish that lives in these waters makes it obvious that mercury pollution is essential. Once people consume those fish that are poisoned, they are also exposed to amounts of mercury, causing autism and other genetic mutations.
Forum: Human Rights
Question of: The adverse effects of the illicit movement of dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights.
Delegate: Veronica Chung, Russia
Recognizingthat The Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights is mandated by the Commission on Human Rights to receive communications from individuals and groups who declare that their human rights have been violated by illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes,
Fully alarmed that 70% of industrial toxic wastes are dumped into rivers and lakes untreated. Especially in China where 70% of the lakes and rivers are polluted from industrial wastes, leaving 300 million people “forced to rely on polluted water supplies”,
Fully aware that many developing countries do not have the national capacities and technologies to process such wastes in order to eradicate or diminish their adverse effects on human rights, including the right to life, the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and the right to water, food, adequate housing and work,
Pointing out that the number of places where water has effectively been starved of oxygen, also called the “dead zones” ,globally has doubled since 1990 and are now filling up 70,000sq kilometers of earth’s surface, which sit the size of Ireland,
Reaffirms that illicit traffic in and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes constitute a serious threat to human rights, including the rights to water, food, adequate housing and work,
Expresses its appreciation to relevant UN bodies, in particular the United Nations Environment Program for the support to special rapporteurs on researches and investigations,
1. Urges all government to take appropriate legislative and other measures, in line with their international obligations, to prevent the illegal movement of toxic and hazardous wastes from developed to developing countries;
2. Requests the governments of developed countries to provide financial assistance to developing countries to create large waste-recycling programs in order to help eradicate as much wastes as possible;
3. Asks that all governments ban the export of toxic and hazardous products , chemicals, pesticides and persistent organic pollutants that are currently banned or severely restricted in their own countries;
4. Invites the United Nations Environment Program and all relevant organizations to continue to intensify their coordination, international cooperation and technical assistance on environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes, including the question of their transboundary movement;
5. Strongly recommends strengthening the role of national environmental protection agencies and NGOs that work with this issue and provide them necessary medical and financial means with its action.
Victoria's Questions
- What is the problem? How does it affect your country?
Blue fin tunas are being overfished alot and it is almost near extinct. Madagascar already has tons of unique animals that are extinct and others are in the same condition as the blue fin tunas. Pushed towards extinction by human activity.- What has your country done to combat the problem?
It has tried to stop the huge deforestation and fires that happen very oftenly every year.- What are the various “sides” in the debate?
Some are fighting to stop fishing blue fin tunas while others argue that there are still plenty of blue fin tunas in the ocean and if they stop fishing there would be too much blue fin tunas.- Which aspects of the issue are most important to your country?
Blue fin tunas are still being overfished and if it is not stoped serious damage can done. Like parts of the natural food chain will be in danger.- If your country is not involved with the issue, how can it become involved?
By joining some groups that are saving blue fin tunas and allying with countries especially in Europe that are doing with all there efforts the best they can to slowly stop fishing blue fin tunas.- How will your country shape the debate at the conference?
It might mention how some unique animals in Madagascar are extremly endangered and how we don't want the Blu FIn Tunas to go the same way- What arguments will other countries make?
-They are already trying to stop the fishing-They don't have much time to consider the blue fin tunas with all the economy crisis going on
-The blue fin tuna is mainly not their problem
-It is some country's main economy
-If they don't fish there might be too much blue fin tunas
- How do the positions of other countries affect your country’s position?
they might argue that blue fin tunas are no where near extinct and there are still plenty left in the Pacific and Atlantic ocean- Is there evidence or statistics that might help to back up your country’s position?
Yes//Back to to//
Opening Speech
Forum of: Environment 2
Questioning of: The future of Blue Fin Tuna species
Delegation: Madagascar
Delegate: Victoria Lin.
School: SAS Pudong
Honorable chair and fellow delegates, the country of Madagascar recognizes the importance of stopping the burning of the rain forests which homes the unique animals of Madagascar. However the delegate of Madagascar would like to focus on the future of another extremely endangered animals, Blue Fin Tunas.
Blue Fin Tunas are being over fished at an extreme rate. Even though efforts have been made by many fellow countries, Blue Fin Tunas are being pushed to the brink of extinction by human activity. The extinction of Blue Fin Tunas would leave a huge dent in the balance of nature. We hope to find a way to help and save the endangered tuna species. The delegate of Madagascar is looking forward to debating this and other issues. Thank you very much.
Back to top
Resolution Final Draft
Environment 2
By Victoria (Madagascar)
Submitter: Madagascar
Topic: The future of Blue Fin Tunas and Madagascar endangered animals
Environment 2
Alarmed by the fact that the population of Blue Fin tunas（Thunnus orientalis）has dropped dramatically during the past 4 years
Bearing in mind that many groups such as, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), Commission for the Conservation of Southern Blue fin Tuna (CCSBT), International Commission for the
Conservation of the Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) are trying with effort to protect Blue Fin Tunas
Noting with concern that a lot of Madagascar's unique wildlife just like Blue Fin Tunas are at the edge of extinction. Such as the Golden Bamboo Lemur, Golden-Crowned Sifika, and the Lesser Yellow Bat
Pointing out that if countries don't take a another step towards protecting endangered species such as Blue fin Tunas may become politically unstable just like a lot of Madagascar’s animals
Deeply concerned for these endangered animals which are being pushed toward extinction by human activity
Acknowledging the fact that after the riot that happened in early this year Madagascar gave about no attention towards the endangered animals of Madagascar